version Date: April - The Wharton School of the University of ...

The Wharton School 

University of Pennsylvania 

Management 621 

MANAGEMENT OF PEOPLE AT WORK 

Wharton MBA Program for Executives - WEST 

Summer 2012 (version date: April 18, 2012) 

Professor John Paul MacDuffie 

3105 Steinberg-Dietrich Hall 

(215) 898-2588 (tel); (215) 898-1094 (fax) 

macduffie@wharton.upenn.edu 

PURPOSE OF THE COURSE 

Organizational life is built around a complex interplay of social forces. Networks of 

cooperation, group conflicts, systems of power and influence, career paths, and reward systems shape 

how people in organizations manage and are managed. The purpose of this course is to provide a 

framework for analyzing the impact of these social forces on individuals, groups, and the organization. 

Management 621 will introduce you to general theories of organizational behavior and human resource 

management, and their application to specific managerial problems. The concepts covered in this 

course will help you better understand how to motivate and lead those you manage, as well as better 

understanding your own motivation and performance at work. 

Managerial and professional careers involve frequent changes in responsibilities, so the course 

also provides concepts for analyzing how managerial approaches may vary in different organizational 

and industry settings. We will discuss, based on these analyses, how to develop and implement 

organizational designs and systems that achieve competitive advantage through the management of 

people. 

After working for several years, individuals often have developed a number of insights into how 

people behave in organizations, and how organizations in turn shape that behavior. We will draw upon 

your experiences in our efforts to analyze and understand the management of people at work. In the 

Field Application Project (FAP), you will have the opportunity to apply those experiences, plus what 

you are learning in this course, to a real organization and its real-world challenges and problems. 

CLASSROOM PARTICIPATION 

All course sessions involve active classroom discussion based on the readings and cases, with a 

focus on both theoretical questions and practical implications. You should be prepared both to share 

your ideas and to listen to and interpret the issues presented by others. Effective discussion depends on 

your willingness to take risks in communicating ideas and to be supportive of and responsive to others.

Management 621 The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania MBAExec (West) – Summer 2012 

Regular participation in discussions is expected, and you should carefully prepare the readings 

and cases for every class session. Individuals are called upon from time to time, but most participation 

is voluntary. Name cards must be consistently displayed during class, and it is essential that you attend 

all course meetings. Participation counts for 20% of your course grade; 15% for individual 

participation in class discussion and 5% for your team’s case presentation (see below). 

In preparing cases for discussion in class, be ready to comment on (1) the case’s background and 

context; (2) the key issues and problems; (3) concepts useful for analyzing the issues and problems; 

and (4) a course of action for designing and implementing solutions. Questions specific to each case 

have been provided in this syllabus to help guide your preparation; however I encourage you to go 

beyond these questions in thinking about how to apply any course concepts that are relevant to the case. 

LEARNING TEAMS AND CASE PRESENTATIONS 

Learning teams are integral to the work of Management 621. Several activities are conducted 

through the teams, and you may find that preparing for class is facilitated by team discussion. All 

participants will be assigned to a learning team by the MBAExec program; team assignment is based 

on diversity of background and experience, subject to physical location constraints. 

Each team is assigned to analyze the case and readings for one class session. Teams will be 

assigned to cases during the first week of classes. This analysis should explore connections within the 

assigned materials (i.e. how do the readings relate to the case and vice-versa) and beyond the material 

to other experiences, examples, and ways of communicating key concepts or insights (i.e. How do the 

readings and/or case relate to the past and present experiences of any member of the team Can you 

think of related and relevant examples from the business world, either past or present Can you 

identify a resource that helps make an important point related to this particular class, e.g. a video, a 

song, an image, a literary reference) 

The assignment requires that you convey your analysis to me and your classmates in two ways: 

1. Team paper -- 4-5 pages double-spaced, sent to me by 5 pm on the day before the class to 

which you are assigned 

2. Team presentation -- 10 minutes in class in which you present the key points from your paper 

in a clear, well-organized, compelling, and (if you wish) creative way 

This team assignment is worth 5% towards the 20% participation grade; as noted above, the 

remaining 15% of the grade is based on individual participation. 

For this team paper, I want the members of your team to dig into the readings and case: 

• What intrigues you 

• What’s thought-provoking 

• What’s important 

• What don’t you quite buy, if anything 

• What do you think the class should note in particular about the link between reading and case 

• What issues do you think the class should grapple with 

2


I’m looking for thoughtful commentary that reflects your team’s discussions of the assigned material – 

not a summary of either the case or the readings and not one person’s solo effort on behalf of the team. 

Do be personal, thoughtful, and analytical. It is fine, and desirable, to use the word “we.” Do 

suggest video clips, songs, newspaper or business media stories, images, literary references etc. that 

help illustrate the points you want to make. When I learn about a particularly helpful resource that is 

suggested by a team, I will provide access to it (i.e. distribute a copy, post a link, show/play it in class). 

For the presentation, you have 10 minutes to convey what was included in your paper. (I will run 

a timer and cut you off when 10 minutes is up.) You may choose from a variety of formats. A 

Powerpoint presentation is fine; more than one person should be involved in the presentation but 

there’s no need for all team members to present. You may also set up a “point and counterpoint” 

discussion/debate; dramatize something from the case; demonstrate points through a role play; show 

different possible future scenarios based on what might happen beyond the case; and there are many 

other possibilities. If you have any questions about whether what you are planning will meet my 

expectations and/or my goals for what is learned during the class, please ask. 

COURSE READINGS 

This is a reading-intensive course. All readings are contained in a coursepack, which will be 

available on Study.net. You will also receive various handouts throughout the course, both in class and 

posted on the courseware website, Canvas. 

SPECIAL TOPIC (NOMINATED BY STUDENTS) 

In recent years, I have asked students to suggest a topic related to the course that they find to be 

important in their jobs/organizations and want to understand better. We then devote a class session to 

this special topic, this year scheduled for Friday, August 3 rd . The nomination process begins during the 

first week of classes, as a discussion topic on Canvas. I consolidate the suggestions into a short list of 

topics and put them to the class for a vote. I then develop a supplement to the syllabus with readings, a 

case, and study questions. The special topic in 2010 was Organizational Design and Structure; in 2011, 

it was Compensation Within Organizations. 

COURSE FEEDBACK CIRCLE 

A single feedback circle is formed with three volunteers from each section to review and guide 

the course work. I will establish the schedule of meetings during the first week of class. 

“FEET WET”: FIRST WEEK WRITING ASSIGNMENT 

I added this assignment after requests to provide some early feedback on your writing and 

whether you are grasping the approach to analytical writing I’m seeking in this course. The basic idea 

is to show that you can link course content (e.g. theories) to a case example (e.g. a specific situation). I 

3


plan to return these one-page papers with comments but no grade -- just check, check-plus, checkminus 

-- and no role in the ultimate grading process. This assignment is due in class on Thursday, 

May 24; I’ll provide the assignment details on Day 1. I’ll also explain other opportunities for writing 

feedback in this course. 

COURSE PAPER #1: ANALYSIS OF YOUR CURRENT (OR PREVIOUS) JOB 

The first graded individual assignment is to analyze your current job (or a previous job) using 

course concepts. More precisely, you should use your job as the “case” that allows you to apply and 

demonstrate your knowledge of the course material. You may explore such issues as motivation, job 

design, reward systems, managing individual and group performance, and group influences on 

decision-making. The choice about what issues to cover and what concepts to apply is yours. In 

evaluating your paper, we will look to see whether the concepts you use are described accurately (i.e. 

substantively correct), applied appropriately (i.e. fit the job situation you describe), and most relevant 

to the situation (i.e. did you pick the concepts that best illuminates your job situation). This paper will 

count for 20% of your course grade. 

In analyzing your job, focus on how you were managed, not how you behaved in managing 

others. It does not matter whether you had a good job experience or a bad job experience. You can 

talk about both the successful and the unsuccessful aspects of the job, and about what was missing for 

you. Very good papers will provide the reader with two things: 1) a sense of how the various issues fit 

together analytically, and 2) a clear feeling for what it was really like to have that job. 

You need to be explicit in your use of the course theories/concepts. Very good papers do not 

simply present a lively and detailed description of your past job. Rather, they demonstrate in-depth 

understanding and application of course concepts and theories. 

Here’s my guidance on how many concepts/theories you should use. More theories can be 

better, because you can analyze more aspects of your job plus demonstrate more knowledge of course 

material. Thus a paper that uses more theories and does so effectively can end up with a higher rank in 

the relative comparison (which is how we grade these papers). However, there are definitely 

diminishing returns if you cover lots of theories, all of them superficially, since this can make it tough 

to see if you actually understand them and how to apply them. Plus you need to provide enough rich 

descriptive material about your job so we can understand it. So I ask for a minimum of three 

concepts/theories. One theory is not enough, six is very likely too many. Within that range, we look 

for you making wise choices about the concepts and theories that best fit your job situation; extra 

theories that don’t really fit won’t help you. 

In using multiple concepts and theories, you also have the opportunity to explore (and 

demonstrate your understanding of) the similarities, complementarities, or inconsistencies among the 

concepts and theories (i.e., do the concepts/theories fit together and reinforce each other or do they 

disagree How do they complement each other Conversely, how are they inconsistent or 

conflicting). This is not required but is something you can consider doing to strengthen your paper, 

assuming that your job situation provides you with the raw material for this analysis. 

Here are a few more words of advice based on our past experiences with these papers: 

4


• Don't forget that this is an exercise that must be graded. It is easy to get carried away with 

an interesting story and forget that this is also a way to test your knowledge of and ability to 

apply the course material. 

• Be sure to explore your personal experience with your job, rather than writing generically 

about the experience of all people in positions like yours. 

• It may be useful to develop a comparative angle in the paper, i.e. compare how your job 

experience varied for two different tasks or compare your job before and after a change in 

your boss or a company restructuring. 

• Remember to mention course theories specifically, so we don’t have to read your mind to 

figure out what concepts you are applying to your work experience. Drawing explicit links 

between the concepts you identify and the case material is the key. Don't just drop in the 

names of a few theories or concepts into the midst of describing your job. Show how they 

apply to your situation. 

• Don't simply focus on your favorite issue, or spend a lot of time on issues that aren't 

relevant to this course. 

The paper should have a normal font and be double-spaced. The maximum length is 1,250 words, 

plus or minus 5%. Please include a word count on the front page. You will have to be concise and make 

choices about what issues to discuss. Formal references or footnotes are not necessary for readings in the 

bulkpack, though be sure to identify a theory or an author explicitly in the text. This paper is due via 

submission to webCafé by the end of day on Saturday, June 23rd. 

COURSE PAPER #2: INDIVIDUAL CASE ANALYSIS 

For the second individual assignment, I ask you to submit a written analysis of a new case, to be 

distributed, along with the questions to address, roughly a month before the paper is due. As with Paper 

#1, I will be looking for the application of course concepts. The maximum length for this case analysis is 

1,500 words, plus or minus 5%; it should have a normal-sized font and be double-spaced. Please include 

a word count on the front page. In view of the word limit, it is not advisable to summarize case data in 

the report, but to use data selectively to make specific points. The grade will be based on the quality of 

the ideas, the appropriateness of the concepts chosen, and on how convincingly the arguments are made. 

This case analysis will count for 20% of your grade. It is due via submission to webCafé by the end of 

day on Wednesday, July 25. 

FIELD APPLICATION PROJECT (FAP) 

The major group assignment for this course is the Field Application Project (FAP), carried out 

through learning teams. To guide you through this project, I’ve developed a separate FAP Handbook, 

which will distributed to you early in the course. I also summarize the main elements of the FAP here. 

5


The focus of this project is applying concepts and theories from the course to real life 

organizational problems in an integrative fashion. You will choose which specific problem to work on, 

and in which organization. Most teams choose the organization of one team member as the FAP site, 

while other teams find their FAP sites through other organizational connections of team members (e.g. 

a place where someone volunteers; via a family member.) 

We will devote certain class sessions to meetings about FAP between the instructor and each 

learning team. The first meeting, roughly 25 minutes per team, is scheduled for Saturday, June 9. 

Teams should plan to develop a one-page summary for the FAP that includes a statement of the 

problem, the planned scope of work, and a preliminary approach to exploring the problem. This onepage 

summary should be e-mailed to me by Wednesday, June 6. The second meeting is scheduled 

for Saturday, July 21. This will be a progress report, again roughly 25 minutes per team. Please 

email a written progress report to me by Wednesday, July 18. 

The final report for FAP is due on the last day of class, Saturday, August 4. The FAP 

reports should be 20 pages long, or roughly 5000 words (word count not needed; appendices not 

included in page count). A case format can prove quite valuable, organizing the report in multiple 

parts, e.g. part 1 that focuses on pure description of the problem or decision situation, part 2 that 

provides your team’s analysis of the problem; and part 3 that provides your team’s recommendations 

for action. Further guidance on the structure of the project report will be provided during the course. 

This report will count for 35% of your course grade. 

Each learning team will also present its work on FAP to the class on the last day of the course. 

The presentation will count for 5% of your course grade. In addition to providing an opportunity to 

present ideas before a group of peers, this also has the advantage of sharing the learning from your 

project. While the percentage of your grade that depends on your FAP presentation is low, the implicit 

motivation to do well on the presentation is high, in my experience, given the natural competitiveness 

of MBAExec students and the feeling of pride that team members have about their FAP work. The 

team should prepare a one page summary of their presentation for distribution to the class. 

By way of illustration, some project titles from the past several years are: 

• Mind the Gap: Confronting Generational Myths among Cisco Employees 

• Improving Attraction and Retention of Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists 

• Black Rock-Barclays Global Investors Merger: Morale and Motivation at Black Rock SF 

• Oracle: Managing Developers, Developing Managers 

• Glengarry GlenSABIC: The New Leads Initiative at Saudi Basic Industries 

• Sid’s Hardware: Jayworking on Jay Street 

• Implementing Cost Savings in the Legal Division of Bristol-Myers Squibb 

• KLA-Tencor Customer Feature Requests: Climbing Out of the Black Hole 

• BOC Edwards: Motivating Employees During Philadelphia Plant Closure 

• Retaining New Mothers in Demanding Jobs: Fox News, Washington Bureau 

• Allegiant Travel: Managing Culture in a Growing Company 

• The Princeton Review: Cracking the Acquisition Test 

• Engaging Associates in Times of Change at Capital One 

• Transitioning to Alternative Legal Fee Structures 

6


• ERisk: One Team, Many ‘I’s’ 

• Star Wars: Being SMART on Retention 

• Red Door Spas: Short-Term Incentives and Their Effects on Employee Motivation 

• Electronic Medical Records: A Clinic’s Long Journey 

• Protecting Pandora’s Box: Preserving Organizational Culture in Recruiting and 

Performance Management 

• Polishing the GemStone: Aligning Goals and Incentives in a Virtual Workforce 

• Swords into Ploughshares: Integrating Military Veterans at Con Edison 

• The Merger of MedCases and IC Axon: A Tale of Two Sales Teams 

• Viropharma Inc.: Evaluating Organizational Dynamics Amid Rapid Growth 

• Deutsche Bank: Managing the Risks of a Location Optimization Strategy 

• How Can Stocklmeir Elementary Motivate and Retain Teachers 

• GE’s Financial Management Program: Doing It Better 

• The Limited Inc.: Redesigning the District Manager’s Role 

• Air Products: Implementing Diversity at a Mature Multi-National Company 

• Retention of Good Technology Employees Inside Motorola 

• Attracting and Retaining Millenials: The Next Generation at Campbell’s 

• Transforming Angel.com into a Customer-Centric Organization 

• Clone or Die: Genentech’s Struggle to Reinvent Itself 

• The Roger Smith Hotel: An Organization at a Cultural Crossroad 

• Managing A Biotech across Two Continents: Organizational Challenges at Chemizon 

• Patient Safety at Swedish Medical Center: A Call to Action 

• Pixar University: The Force Behind Efficient Employee Utilization 

• Connecting the Links at AirLink 

• The Differentiated Workforce at Cypress Semiconductor 

• Searching for Innovation at Microsoft Online Services Division 

• Asian Americans for Community Involvement: Enhancing Organizational Efficiency 

EVALUATION 

Course evaluation is based on written work and classroom participation, including both 

individual contributions and group activities, weighted as follows: 

Class participation (including team case presentation) 

Course paper – analysis of your current job 

Individual case analysis 

Field Application Project -- written report 

Field Application Project -- team presentation 

20 percent 

20 percent 

20 percent 

35 percent 

5 percent 

7


SUMMARY OF CLASS SESSIONS 

MBAExec WEST -- Summer 2012 

Day 1, Session A Introduction to Management of People at Work Mon., May 21 

Day 1, Session B Motivating Individual Performance Mon., May 21 

Day 2, Session A Designing Jobs Wed., May 23 

Day 2, Session B Designing Reward Systems Wed., May 23 

Day 3, Session A, B Understanding Social Identities (w/Peter Kuriloff) Thurs., May 24 

Day 4, Session A Recruiting and Selecting Employees Fri., June 8 

Day 4, Session B Leadership and Individual Performance Fri., June 8 

Day 5, Session A, B First Meeting about FAP project Sat., June 9 

Day 6, Session A Driving Group Performance Fri., June 22 

Day 6, Session B Decision-Making in Groups and Organizations Fri., June 22 

Day 7, Session A Organizing for Productivity and Quality Sat., June 23 

Day 7, Session B Organizing for Innovation Sat., June 23 

Day 8, Session A Managing a Startup Fri., July 20 

Day 8, Session B Creating a High-Performance Culture Fri., July 20 

Day 9, Session A,B Second Meeting about FAP project Sat., July 21 

Day 10, Session A Special Topic: Nominated by Students Fri., August 3 

Day 10, Session B Aligning Human Resources and Business Strategy Fri., August 3 

Day 11, Session A, B Presentation of FAP Project Sat., August 4 

SUMMARY OF COURSE ASSIGNMENT DATES 

Thurs., May 24 “Feet wet” writing assignment due in class 

Wed., June 6 1-page FAP proposal e-mailed to instructor 

Sat., June 9 Team meeting #1 with instructor re: FAP 

Sat., June 23 Paper analyzing your job submitted via Canvas 

Wed., July 18 FAP progress report e-mailed to instructor 

Sat., July 21 Team meeting #2 with instructor re: FAP 

Wed., July 25 Individual case analysis submitted via Canvas 

Sat., August 4 FAP presentation (1 pg.) & FAP report (20 pgs.) 

8


TOPICS AND READINGS 

Day 1, Session A COURSE INTRODUCTION Mon., May 21 

Description: We emphasize the central goal for the course: to provide students with insights into 

the complexities of human behavior at work and in organizations. We describe the sequence of 

topics, from the individual level (motivation, job design, equity issues) to the group level 

(stimulating effective group performance, group decision-making) and the organizational level 

(culture, organizational design, human resource systems and the link to business strategy). We also 

review course requirements. The readings and case will let us consider key issues confronting 

managers of people at work, now and in the past, to look for similarities and differences. 

Readings: Selections (mostly from Fast Company: “Engines of Democracy: General Electric” 

(October 1999); “Free Agents in the Olde World” (May 2001); “Miracle of Birth” (October 2002); 

“The Fabric of Creativity” (December 2004); “A Prescription for Innovation” (April 2006); “No 

Satisfaction at Toyota” (December 2006); “The Faces and Voices of Google” (March 2008); 

Interview with Costco CEO Jim Sinegal (November 2008); “How CAA Plans to Liberate Game 

Designers” (April 2010); “Hey Rock Stars, Take Your Show Somewhere Else” (January 2011; NY 

Times); “Would You Like a Smile with That” (August 2011; NY Times); “KAYAK on Creating a 

Culture of Innovation” (April 2012) Note: These can be sampled and skimmed; they introduce 

recent developments in the world of work that we will consider during the course. 

Case: The Rose Company 

1. What is the nature of the change in this company 

2. How do the vice presidents feel about the reorganization 

3. What should James Pierce do -- and what will he do 

Day 1, Session B MOTIVATING INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE Mon., May 21 

Description: We begin with an obvious truism about human behavior in organizations -- that 

people will behave according to what actions they perceive are being rewarded. We then begin our 

exploration of the theme “behavior is not that simple” by pointing out how often organizations 

“reward A while hoping for B”. We also introduce various motivation theories from the behavioral 

sciences and contrast them with more economics-based views of motivation (e.g. agency theory) 

which emphasize financial incentives and contract-based goal alignment. 

Readings: Steven Kerr, “On the Folly of Rewarding A While Hoping for B,” Academy of 

Management Executive, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 7-14, 1994. 

Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge, excerpts from “Motivation,” Organizational Behavior, 

12 th edition, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 2007, pp. 192-198, 208-210. 

Case: Nordstrom Department Store 

1. Who sets the performance goals, and how are they set 

2. What are the major positive and negative effects of this incentive system 

9


Day 2, Session A DESIGNING REWARD SYSTEMS Wed., May 23 

Description: Here we focus on the design of reward systems, keeping in mind various cognitive 

processes that affect motivation. We introduce concepts from equity theory, which describes how 

individuals assess the ratio of outcomes (pay, recognition) in relation to inputs (of effort, skill, 

experience) for themselves in comparison with others. We then consider the actions (and shifts in 

perception) individuals may undertake to establish a sense of equity. The case discussion 

emphasizes how the compensation and reward system of an organization must balance incentive and 

equity concerns. We also explore the role of the labor market in constraining the kinds of 

compensation systems firms can implement. Please come prepared with examples of reward systems 

you have encountered and we will discuss them. 

Readings: Elliot Aronson, “The Rationalizing Animal,” Psychology Today, May 1973, p. 67-77. 

Stephen P. Robbins & Timothy A. Judge, “Equity Theory,” from Organizational Behavior, 12 th 

edition, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 2007, pp. 203-207. 

Case: Brainard, Bennis, and Farrell 

1. How should the lawyers listed at the back of the case (A-F) be paid 

2. Please meet with your learning team and decide how to apportion 100 points between 

them. Come to class ready to present and defend your choice. 

Day 2, Session B DESIGNING JOBS Wed., May 23 

Description: We next examine job design -- one important source of implicit rewards at work. We 

teach Hackman and Oldham’s job design theory, which analyzes the five dimensions of a job that 

contribute to its motivational potential. We then explore how poor job design can kill motivation 

even when explicit incentives are well-designed – and conversely, how helping someone see the 

connection between their work and the impact on an end-user can be powerfully motivating. 

Readings: “Frederick Winslow Taylor: Father of Scientific Management,” selection from 

Business: The Ultimate Resource, Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing, 2002, pp. 1054-55. 

J. Richard Hackman, Greg Oldham, Robert Janson, and Kenneth Purdy, “A New Strategy for Job 

Enrichment,” California Management Review, Vol. 17, pp. 57-71. 

Adam M. Grant, “How customers can rally your troops: End users can energize your workforce far 

better than your managers can,” Harvard Business Review, June 2011: 97-103. 

Case: Jennifer Henderson and the International Division at Trustworthy Trust 

1. Why are analysts such as Henderson demoralized 

2. Why do senior managers seem so satisfied 

3. What recommendations would you offer the Executive Vice President Marshall Wilde 

10


Day 3, Sessions A, B UNDERSTANDING SOCIAL IDENTITIES Thur., May 24 

(with Prof. Peter Kuriloff, Graduate School of Education) 

*** “FEET WET” ASSIGNMENT DUE IN CLASS TODAY *** 

Readings: Gary Gemmill, “The Dynamics of Scapegoating in Small Groups,” Small Group 

Behavior, vol. 20, no. 4, 1989, pp. 406-418. 

Myron Lustig and Jolene Koester, “Cultural Identity, Cultural Biases, and Intercultural Contact,” 

chapter 6 in Intercultural Competence: Interpersonal Communication Across Cultures, Boston, 

MA: Allyn & Bacon, 2000, pp. 139-173. 

Day 4, Session A RECRUITING AND SELECTING EMPLOYEES Fri., June 8 

Description: In this class, we turn our attention to employee recruitment and selection. Researchers 

have identified a number of strategies likely to yield fair, valid, and effective hiring decisions. We 

review these strategies and discuss possible reasons why many companies do not put these strategies 

into place. We then explore the attraction-selection-attrition cycle and the implications for 

organizational culture and performance. The SG Cowen case provides an opportunity to analyze 

one company’s recruiting and selection practices; to “select” two of their applicants for hire; and to 

examine our assumptions about what makes an effective hire. 

Reading: Benjamin Schneider, “The People Make The Place,” Personnel Psychology, Vol. 40, 

1987, pp. 437-53. 

Case: SG Cowen: New Recruits 

1. Who would you hire and why 

2. How will the change in recruiting strategy proposed by Chip Rae affect the nature of the 

company and its culture 

3. How would you assess the choice between hiring better students at less selective schools vs. 

less successful students at more selective schools – what are you getting in each case 

Day 4, Session B APPRAISING INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE Fri., June 8 

Description: We continue on the topic of individual performance, introducing dilemmas that 

managers face with respect to directing, supporting, and evaluating the work of subordinates: 

balancing implicit rewards (challenging work assignments, recognition) with explicit rewards (pay); 

weighing incentives for individual achievement vs. incentives for the group or team; and handling 

performance appraisal in a way that communicates goals and expectations accurately and motivates 

improved performance. To guide subordinates towards high individual performance may require 

managers to be flexible and adaptive in their leadership style. The case focuses on a situation where 

cross-cultural issues also complicate a manager’s choices on these issues. 

Reading: John J. Gabarro and Linda A. Hill, “Managing Performance,” Harvard Business School, 

January, 2002 (9-496-022). 

11


Case: Karen Leary (A) 

1. How would you assess Chung’s performance, and how would you rate Leary’s management 

of him and the office 

2. If you were Chung, how might you have better managed your relationship with Leary 

3. If you were Leary, how might you have better managed your relationship with Chung 

Day 5, Session A, B MEETING #1 -- FIELD APPLICATION PROJECT Sat., June 9 

During this session, I will meet with each learning team to discuss their ideas for the FAP project. 

My purpose is mainly to offer suggestions based on my previous experience of student groups 

working on similar assignments and to provide a sounding board. Teams should plan to develop a 

one-page summary proposal for the FAP project that includes a statement of the problem, the 

planned scope of work, and a preliminary approach to exploring the problem. This one-page 

summary should be e-mailed to me by Wednesday, June 6th. 

Day 6, Session A DRIVING GROUP PERFORMANCE Fri., June 22 

Description: Here we emphasize the power of group norms and information provided by 

coworkers, subordinates, and bosses as influences on individual behavior. These social influences 

can, if well-managed, help align group and individual goals with organizational goals, yield higher 

performance than individuals provide, especially when tasks are complex and demand 

complementary skills, and build a common language and shared experience base to facilitate 

coordination and creativity. If poorly managed, however, group norms and information can foster 

inappropriate conformity and compliance, diminishing individual, team, or organizational 

effectiveness and integrity. We explore both the potentially positive and the potentially negative 

consequences of social influence in this class and take a close look at how managers create (and 

respond to) groups that are “hot” – lively, high-achieving, dedicated groups, usually small, whose 

members are turned on to an exciting and challenging task. 

Reading: “Social Influence,” from Thomas Gilovich, Dacher Keltner, and Richard E. Nisbett, 

Social Psychology, NYC: WW Norton and Co., 2006, pp. 213-230, 240-253. 

Case: Soul of a New Machine 

1. Why is the Eclipse group working so hard 

2. In what ways does West give and receive feedback from his group and the organization 

3. Do you think West’s leadership of the group is successful in the short-run In the long-run 

What are the risks involved in his style 

Day 6, Session B DECISION-MAKING IN GROUPS & ORGANIZATIONS Fri., June 22 

Description: Group influences in organizations are not always positive. In this class, we consider 

situations in which social influences can pull individuals away from alignment with management’s 

12


goals and result in distorted decision-making dominated by unthinking conformity and compliance 

with group biases. 

Reading: Irving L. Janis, “Groupthink,” Psychology Today, November 1971, pp. 43-46, 74-76. 

In-class exercise: Materials distributed during class 

*** JOB ANALYSIS PAPER SUBMITTED VIA WEBCAFE ON SAT., JUNE 23rd *** 

Day 7, Session A ORGANIZING FOR PRODUCTIVITY & QUALITY Sat., June 23 

Description: We look at the organization of work and the human resource policies associated with 

“lean” or “flexible” production (as contrasted with traditional “mass production”) and the link to 

quality and productivity outcomes (topics you will cover more directly in an OPIM class later this 

year.) We teach the NUMMI case, emphasizing the “people” side of the production system, e.g. 

teams, job rotation, training, standardized work, and other human resource policies. A key theme is 

how crucially inter-dependent the “people” policies (social system) and manufacturing policies 

(technical system) are under lean production. We will also explore how NUMMI, a joint venture 

between Toyota and General Motors (recently closed, for reasons we will discuss) approached 

changing from a mass to lean production system and the cultural change this entailed. 

Reading: John Shook, “How to Change a Culture: Lessons From NUMMI,” MIT Sloan 

Management Review, Vol. 51, #2, pp. 63-68, 2010. 

Ceci Connolly, “Toyota Assembly Line Inspires Improvements at Hospital,” Washington Post, June 

3, 2005. 

Case: Maryann Keller, “A Tale of Two Plants: NUMMI Teamwork vs. GM Bureaucracy,” in Rude 

Awakening, (New York: William Morrow, 1989), pp. 125-44. 

1. What key decisions did Toyota make in deciding how to manage the NUMMI joint 

venture plant 

2. Why did teams prove to be successful at NUMMI and not at Van Nuys 

3. Why has General Motors had so much difficulty learning and diffusing the lessons of 

NUMMI to its own operations 

Day 7, Session B ORGANIZING FOR INNOVATION Sat., June 23 

Discussion: In an era of rapid technological change, large, established firms commonly have 

difficulty moving as quickly as start-up firms. Hence they often acquire start-up’s, partly to access 

their innovative products, but even more so their employees, who possess valuable human capital. 

But acquisitions are risky because integrating two firms with different cultures can be very difficult 

and often key employees leave in the process. We will examine Cisco Systems, which has become 

renowned for its skillful acquisitions of small technology companies, its rapid integration of human 

capital from the acquired firms, and the relatively low turnover of those individuals. We’ll explore 

13


how Cisco approaches the acquisition process from an organizational design and human resource 

systems perspective, and consider whether this strategy for innovation is sustainable over time. 

Reading: Peter Cappelli, “A Market-Driven Approach to Retaining Talent,” Harvard Business 

Review, January-February 2000, pp. 103-111. 

Case: Cisco Systems: Acquiring and Retaining Talent in Hypercompetitive Markets, from Charles 

A. O’Reilly III and Jeffrey Pfeffer, Hidden Value: How Great Companies Achieve Extraordinary 

Results with Ordinary People, Harvard Business School Press, 2000, pp. 49-74. 

Plus: Recent articles about Cisco 

1. How does Cisco evaluate potential acquisition candidates 

2. How does Cisco’s organizational structure facilitate the integration of acquired firms 

3. How do Cisco’s human resources policies facilitate the integration of acquired firms 

4. Can Cisco’s acquisition policies provide a sustained competitive advantage Are they 

difficult to imitate 

5. How will Cisco need to change its acquisition strategy following the dot.bust How 

should it pursue innovation under these changed circumstances 

Day 8, Session A MANAGING A START-UP Sat., July 20 

Description: The challenges associated with a start-up company are very different from those of 

managing a long-established firm. Even if acquiring and retaining talented individuals is key to a 

start-up’s success, the pressing needs of establishing the business often push attention to “managing 

people” issues to the bottom of the priority list, particularly implementing systematic approaches to 

such basic functions as hiring, training, assessing performance, and providing non-financial rewards. 

We will use the reading about different managerial/cultural “blueprints” found among a sample of 

Silicon Valley start-ups and a case about a recent start-up to examine how entrepreneurs can most 

effectively accomplish innovation and sustainable business success through their management of 

highly skilled human capital. We’ll also explore the start-up experiences of class members. 

Reading: James N. Baron and Michael T. Hannan, “Organizational Blueprints for Success in High- 

Tech Start-Ups,” California Management Review, Vol. 44, No. 3, 2002, pp. 8-36. 

Case: Automated Travel Systems 

Day 8, Session B CREATING A HIGH-PERFORMANCE CULTURE Sat., July 20 

Description: Here we explore the sources, and consequences, of a strong, performance-oriented 

organizational culture. The readings provide definitions and frameworks for thinking about 

organizational culture and point out how difficult culture change can be. The case, Mary Kay 

Cosmetics, reveals how a strong performance-oriented culture emerges from the early choices of the 

firm’s founder and is reinforced through the skillful use of ritual and ceremony. We will discuss the 

14


ways in which a manager’s job involves the creation and shaping of meaning for a firm’s 

employees. 

Reading: Edgar H. Schein, “Organizational Culture,” American Psychologist, Vol. 45 (2), 1990, 

pp. 109-19. 

Case: Mary Kay Cosmetics Inc. (and pages 1-7 from Mary Kay Cosmetics: Asian Market Entry) 

1. What are the artifacts, the espoused values, and the underlying assumptions of the 

culture at Mary Kay Cosmetics 

2. How does Mary Kay use ritual and ceremony to create a high-performance culture 

What are the strengths and weaknesses of this approach to achieving performance 

Day 9, Session A, B TEAM MEETING #2 -- Sat., July 21 

PROGRESS REPORT ON FAP PROJECT 

The purpose of these meetings with learning teams is to get a progress report on the projects and do 

problem-solving about obstacles that may have arisen at this point. The goal is to be sure that teams 

are on track to completing their FAP report and presentation by August 4th. A team progress 

report should be emailed to me by Wed., July 18th. 

*** CASE ANALYSIS PAPER SUBMITTED VIA WEBCAFE ON WED. JULY 25th *** 

Day 10, Session A SPECIAL TOPIC (Nominated by Students) Fri., August 3 

Day 10, Session B ALIGNING HUMAN RESOURCES & Fri., August 3 

BUSINESS STRATEGY 

Description: We highlight both successful and unsuccessful cases in which the alignment (or 

misalignment) between human resources systems and business strategy is the central issue. We also 

make clear that there is no “one best way” for all companies in all industries to organize their 

systems for managing people. In the case discussion, we try to untangle the factors behind the early 

success and ultimate failure of People Express – was it the business strategy the HR system -- 

and compare it to the current examples of Southwest Airlines and JetBlue, successful airlines 

following many of the same HR policies as People Express. 

Reading: Jeffrey Pfeffer, “Producing Sustainable Competitive Advantage Through the Effective 

Management of People,” Academy of Management Executive, 2005, Vol. 19 (4): pp. 95-106. 

Case: People Express (A) 

1. What was the business strategy, managerial objectives, and assumptions about managing 

people underlying the design of People Express’s human resource system 

15


2. What are the strengths and weaknesses of this approach 

3. How might the firm have achieving a better fit between its strategy and its human 

resource system What different strategies would fit with the HR system What 

different HR systems would fit the original strategy 

Day 11, Sessions A, B PRESENTATIONS OF FAP PROJECT Sat., August 4 

*** FAP PROJECT REPORT DUE TODAY *** 

The total time allotted to your group presentation will be between 15-20 minutes. Please plan to 

spend just half of this time on your presentation. Use whatever format and audio-visual tools you 

need to communicate the key learning from your project most effectively. The remaining time is 

allocated to taking and responding to questions from the audience. 

Please have a one-page handout summarizing your presentation for each member of the 

audience. 

16

version Date: April - The Wharton School of the University of ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?